There is evidence that some severe and debilitating conditions respond well to marijuana, including the nausea that accompanies chemotherapy for cancer, or the loss of appetite and inability to keep food down that plagues HIV sufferers. Thats why Oregon voters — correctly, in our view — agreed to allow limited medical use of marijuana.
There is also evidence that some people licensed to grow marijuana for patients are making money on the side by selling it to those without medical marijuana cards. And, as The Oregonian pointed out, of the 36,380 Oregonians with cards, 32,614 checked “severe pain” as their reason for needing the drug.
Are the protesters who picketed us last week willing to swear that not one of those people was using the law as a way to use marijuana recreationally without fear of prosecution? We suspect not.
We note, however, that a news release announcing the protest carried the endorsement of the local chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. NORMLs mission, according to its website, is “to move public opinion sufficiently to achieve the repeal of marijuana prohibition so that the responsible use of cannabis by adults is no longer subject to penalty.”
Well, allow me to retort:
Your defense of the Oregonian editorial turns out to be as moralistic and incorrect as the original.
“There is evidence that some severe and debilitating conditions respond well to marijuana,” true enough, but there is as much evidence that general health responds well to cannabis. For example, those who smoke cannabis-only have lower incidence of head, neck, and lung cancers, and no greater risk of emphysema or COPD.
“36,380 Oregonians with cards, 32,614 checked “severe pain”". Indeed, but patients can choose more than one condition. When you have cancer, you have pain. HIV/AIDS, pain. MS, epilepsy, glaucoma… pain. Over 17,000 patients have registered for conditions other than pain.
But you strike the moralist tone that some people in pain are faking it, or that pain isn’t “severe and terminal” enough. “Unresponsive to conventional medication,” casting cannabis as “unconventional” when the law states it “shall be treated like other medicines”. As if cannabis (whose worst side effects are giggling, red eyes, dry mouth, and munchies) should be the medicine of last resort only if the pills that destroy your liver, stop up your bowels, get you hooked, put you in a stupor, and can potentially kill you aren’t effective.
That we have ONLY 36,000 registered patients shows how effective the prohibition of cannabis is in demonizing what should be the medicine of first resort for so many people.
“Using the law as a way to use marijuana recreationally without fear of prosecution?” Well, if so, that “recreational pot smoker” just gave the state $100, all his identification and the address where he will be storing and growing marijuana. This after fooling a doctor through multiple examinations and then a medical records review staff and another doctor at a medical marijuana clinic, injecting money into the economy and creating jobs along the way in one of the few growth businesses in Oregon. I can understand how the rare fraud in benefits programs hurts society; I can’t understand how the rare fraud in medical marijuana is any worse for the state than that “pot smoker” and his money remaining underground, or if caught, costing taxpayers to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate him.
Which leads me to my biggest complaint: the idea that “endorsement of the local chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws” invalidates the protest against mis-characterization of medical marijuana. At NORML, we believe all adults 21 and over should be able to responsibly use cannabis for any reason… so how could we possibly NOT support sick and disabled adults legally using cannabis for medical reasons? It is possible for both realities of cannabis to be true: cannabis is an amazing medicine that can help sick people AND cannabis is a wonderful relaxant that can help healthy people. Believing in the latter does not make the former untrue.
RUSS BELVILLE
NORML OUTREACH COORDINATOR
The point moron is too stop ruining peoples lives over a plant! Idiot!You like the dog killing and people shooting? Come on to ill they will put your ignorant ass to work!
I am a 52 year old woman who doesn’t really care for the smell, or taste of pot much less the idea of putting it into my lungs. Three years ago I was run over and pinned under a car( I was a pedestrian). Needless to say, I tried every kind of drug, procedure, alternative therapy and the cost for just the medicine is 1500.00 per month. This made me try a pot pill… guess what, my body relaxed and my pain was better. I do not like the feeling of being “stoned”, but now there are strains that don’t get you stoned, only relieve pain. This is brilliant work for all of us that really need pain relief, but are not used to the effects of the THC on our brain, however when I take Percocet my brain feels “wrong” as well.
So for all of you who doubt that Pot is really helpful, lets pray you never have to be the one to walk in my shoes.
You people are on drugs. (But we knew that…)
No one who should be allowed out without a minder, believes that INHALING SMOKE of ANY kind is going to result in “lower incidence of head, neck, and lung cancers, and no greater risk of emphysema or COPD”. Give me a BREAK – Are you stoned, or just stupid?
That said, outlawing a plant substance, and prosecuting the hypocritical dimwits who are swilling it while referring to their drugtaking as “medicating”, is a waste of time, money, and law enforcement resources. The solution is to repeal all of the laws other than administering the substance to someone else, which should be considered a form of poisoning them, and prosecuted accordingly.
(By the way… are you luminaries going to be willing to accept responsibility for the epidemic of early-onset schizophrenia, arrested emotional development, amotivational syndrome, and, yes – SMOKE INHALATION related conditions which will result from turning us into a nation of mindless potheads? Yeah… Responsibility. You probably can’t even spell it, and it’s certainly not on your menu selection…)
Prop 19′s language says that cities and counties can choose not to allow commercial sales of cannabis to all adults, BUT also includes an explicit exception for commercial sales for medical users.
Russ, if Prop 19 passes, when will it become effective? And will it be legal to buy bud from medical dispensaries even if my county/city hasn’t passed any laws concerning recreational shops? I don’t own any land to grow a 5X5. I guess I could just go the traditional route in securing bud, but I really wish I could buy from a store where I could pay taxes like a normal person and get a product I know is the shit for sure. Plus, I liked your circles argument, my philosophy teacher would be proud!
Even within NORML we have different views on cannabis. An old mindset of “cannabis isn’t bad for you” is giving way to a new mindset of “cannabis is good for you”. It’s been hard for some to address it that way because for years, we’ve had to fight on defense. Now that the tide is turning and we can fight on offense, you’ll hear more stuff from us like my last three sentences.
At least from me.
It’s just needed to be framed as “OF COURSE we’re for medical marijuana – if we support all using, how can we not support some using?” rather than “OH NO, medical marijuana is something completely separate from our legalization goals.” The latter creates a Venn diagram of medical and legalization circles that don’t touch, whereas the former creates a big legalization circle with a smaller medical circle inside it (and circles for religious use and industrial hemp are in that big circle as well). Voters instinctively feel the two separate circles are some sort of con, because basic logic dictates the big circle with little circles inside.
The only thing I can criticize about NORML’s stand on all things cannabis is that I think they tend to avoid stronger support for the last 3 sentences in your article.
Then again, Russ, I know you have personally witnessed the medical value found by those very close to you, and the same may not be true of others in the organization.
I believe no one should be subject to even the smallest fine, much less incarceration, for cannabis use.
But at the same time, I know rec users have an easier decision when it comes to breaking the law in order to do so. There’s a real difference between risking getting busted to get a buzz and risking getting busted for trying to obtain medicinal relief.
West coasters tend to forget there are 37 states which still deny medical patients safe and legal access to cannabis (NJ is still stalling).
Luckily though no one gives a shit what the Southern Oregon Mail Tribune thinks.